“Progressively, he started to refrain from viewing videos as a means of avoiding headaches,” ABC News quoted researchers from Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University in New Delhi, India, as writing in the case study.

TORONTO, ONTARIO--(Marketwire - June 29, 2012) - An unmistakable pink bus will lead members of Ontario's largest union in this Saturday's Dyke March in Toronto. The bus, belonging to CUPE Local 966, will provide support to the marchers, but also help draw attention to the ongoing strike in the Region of Peel.

"CUPE Ontario members are in the Dyke March to recognize the strength and contribution of lesbian women to our communities, our workplaces and within our union" says Fred Hahn, President of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Ontario. "We also want to recognize the strength of the women who are on the picket lines in Peel fighting for equality."

Local 966 members from Ontario Works/Human Services, TransHelp and Public Works are currently on strike seeking a contract that is consistent with those given by municipalities within the region. The Ontario Works/Human Services unit has been out longest and most of its members are women. They provide services relating to employment, child and health care, court support and immigration settlement.

"This has been a good spring for LGBTQ people with the passing of anti-bullying legislation and Toby's Act. We're calling on the Region of Peel to cap it all off by showing respect and equality to working women," says Denise Hammond, CUPE Ontario executive board member and President of Local 1281.

Any queer who insists on parading against the only queer-friendly country in the Middle East (a region where queers often find themselves on the receiving end of a noose or a series of large, fatal stones) has got to be the stupidest queer in the world. Exhibit A: Tim McCaskell, member of that collection of self-righteous buffoons who rally under the Queers Against Israeli Apartheid banner. Tim is delighted that at the last minute QuAIA has been given the go-ahead to march in Sunday's Pride parade. As he tells the Toronto Star

Pride is a very broad tent. People may disagree with each other on a whole range of issues but we’re all queer and we all face homophobia and transphobia...This is an opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to human rights, not just for gay people, but for everyone.

Dear Tim: You do know what's under "a very broad tent," don't you? A circus. Which come to think of it is the perfect place for all you Zion-loathing Bozos.

Update: A poem for the Bozos:

A message for all QuAIA queers:You're simply mistaken, my dears.That "apartheid" allegation's A prevarication.So take your heads out of your rears.

Still, quibbling over whose pretzel argument is more ingeniously twisted – the government's or the court's – is to debate, in Samuel Johnson's words, the precedence between a louse and a flea. I have great respect for George Will, but his assertion that the Supreme Court decision is a "huge victory" that will "help revive a venerable tradition" of "viewing congressional actions with a skeptical constitutional squint" and lead to a "sharpening" of "many Americans' constitutional consciousness" is sufficiently delusional that one trusts mental health is not grounds for priority check-in at the death panel. Back in the real world, it is a melancholy fact that tens of millions of Americans are far more European in their view of government than the nation's self-mythologizing would suggest. Indeed, citizens of many Continental countries now have more – what's the word? – liberty in matters of health care than Americans. That's to say, they have genuinely universal government systems alongside genuinely private-system alternatives. Only in America does "health" "care" "reform" begin with the hiring of 16,500 new IRS agents tasked with determining whether your insurance policy merits a fine. It is the perverse genius of Obamacare that it will kill off what's left of a truly private health sector without leading to a truly universal system. However, it will be catastrophically unaffordable, hideously bureaucratic, and ever more coercive. So what's not to like?

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." That's etched in stone on one of Washington's impressively monumental buildings. I saw it myself just last week. Too bad Chief Justice Roberts let down his guard, averted his gaze, and allowed liberty to be sandbagged by what will go down in history as the biggest and worst of Barack Obama's very bad ideas.

Friday, June 29, 2012

In a scene from her most famous
movie, “When Harry Met Sally” (1989), Ephron brought to mainstream,
predominantly female audiences the spectacle of a professional actress (Meg
Ryan), not a porn prop, performing an extended impression of an orgasm in a
crowded delicatessen. It was supposed to be the ultimate put-down of her crass
male companion (Billy Crystal). Was this merely a smart update of the onscreen
battle of the sexes once famously waged by Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy?
Or had we become party to something darker? Either way, America laughed, and
Ephron is today eulogized for this unforgettable display.

It was a first, all right, but
maybe not so funny, since it was also a milestone in the pornification of the
American middle class. This has been a long process in which increasingly
voyeuristic audiences watch as increasingly untrammeled moviemakers rob human
sexuality of intimacy and consequence. “When Harry Met Sally” took us over the
top, cauterizing audiences to a new convention of shamelessness – the ideal of
Betty Friedan feminism.

And then what happened? Ever
since, as a Salon.com critic approvingly wrote, “rom-coms have gotten
increasingly raunchy and foulmouthed, often desperately so. But whatever
supposed new twists writers dream up – make the lovers casual-sex partners or
bisexual polyamorists or ex-lovers of each other’s parents – they’re just
spraying Cool Whip on a cake that Ephron baked.”

This must make Ephron the mother
of the transgressive “gross-out” comedy, even if she is more politely celebrated
as the queen of romantic comedy...

I love Diana, but I don't know if I buy her assessment. I'd pin the blame for today's "gross-out" comedy not on the late Ms. Ephron but on the much-later Bluto Blutarsky.

If you want to read a digest of the inane, the idiotic and the anti-Zionistic, you'd be well advised to peruse the Canadian Islamic Congress's Friday Magazine. This week's edition is particularly pernicious.

Britain and the European Union have joined Israel in condemning the antisemitic comments made by a senior Iranian politician about drug addiction being a Zionist conspiracy.

Mohammad Reza Rahimi, the Iranian vice-president, claimed there were no Zionist drug addicts, which he said was proof that the Talmud was a tool used for "inciting global drug trade and addiction in a bid to annihilate non-Jewish communities".

In response, the Israeli Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman, accused the leadership in Tehran of being "antisemitic fanatics".

Catherine Ashton, the EU's foreign policy representative, described the remarks as "racist and antisemitic" and said she was deeply disturbed by them.

"We condemn utterly the baseless comments from Iran's vice-president Rahimi about the Talmud and the Jewish faith, made at a United Nations drugs control event in Tehran this week," said Alistair Burt, Britain's Minister for the Middle East.

"Racism and antisemitism are unacceptable in any circumstance, let alone at an event sponsored by the United Nations.

"We call upon Iran to correct this scandalous statement, and to ensure that its officials respect the proper international norms and standards in the future."

You can call upon it all you want. It'll never, ever happen. (Has the example of Hitler taught you nothing?)

Anti-Zionist QuAIA finds itself intermingled with the like-minded. From Xtra:

Hundreds of marchers took over Yonge Street June 25 for the Queers for Social Justice night march.

The route was not revealed until the march kicked off at 9pm and by the end of the march, the crowd numbered around 400 people.

Queers for Social Justice is a new local group comprised of a coalition of activist organizations, including Queer Ontario, Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (QuAIA), AIDS Action Now and the Trans Lobby Group.

Head marshal and Queer Ontario vice-chair Casey Oraa says the march had great energy and a celebratory feel. “Everyone had a great time and there was great political spirit,” he says.

Update: I've been reading Jonah Goldberg's The Tyranny of Clichesand was fascinated to learn that the term "social justice" was originally coined by a Catholic Church theologian. It was meant to broaden the definition of "justice," which is he domain of the state, in order to allow space for "the autonomy and spiritual authority of, among other things, the Church." Soon enough, it strayed far from its originator's intention, becoming synomous with an amorphous, general "goodness," i.e. "goodness" as the left conceives (or misconceives) it. In that sense, "social justice" is for Catholics what "tikkun olam" is for Jews: a concept that, at first, meant something specifically religious, but that has been seized upon by those purveying the leftist agenda. And they think we should all shut up and allow them to prevail because as upholders of "social justice"/"tikkum olam," they alone occupy the moral high ground, thereby embodying all that is good and fair and true. How wrong they are!

Dov Fischer writes that anyone with legal expertise knows who really won, and it wasn't the left:

Until Thursday's decision, for more than 70 years, virtually every leading Supreme Court decision on the reach of the Commerce Clause has sided with federal intrusion. Although there have been isolated exceptions -- e.g., United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) (limiting federal regulation regarding carrying guns near schools) and United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598 (2000) (limiting power of the federal government to expand rights of women to sue attackers) -- the leading cases on the Commerce Clause, often relying on precedents like Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) (holding that Congress could prevent a person from growing wheat for his own personal consumption on his own private land), have held that the federal government can force Americans to do or not do, to buy or not buy, virtually anything if couched as an act to facilitate or regulate interstate commerce. Wickard "always has been regarded as the ne plus ultra of expansive Commerce Clause jurisprudence." (Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito, JJ., dissenting, at 3.)

It was this very line of Wickard-consistent Supreme Court opinions that served as the basis for a long line of lower federal courts, both district courts and federal appeals courts, choosing to uphold ObamaCare as that bill was tested through the judiciary. However, with Chief Justice Roberts almost surreptitiously joining with Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy in ruling that ObamaCare is barred by the federal Commerce Clause, a new era has begun in Commerce Clause jurisprudence.

Every liberal citation to Wickard will be countered by a conservative citing to Chief Justice Roberts's opinion: "If no enumerated power authorizes Congress to pass a certain law, that law may not be enacted, even if it would not violate any of the express prohibitions in the Bill of Rights or elsewhere in the Constitution. . . . The Court today holds that our Constitution protects us from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause so long as we abstain from the regulated activity. The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. . . . The Federal Government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance." (National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, Slip op. at 3, 41-42, 44)

There is now a formal United States Supreme Court opinion on the books, overdue by nearly a century, holding that the federal government may not wield the Commerce Clause to impose on American citizens the obligation to buy health insurance or anything else we do not want.

Obamacare is now essentially upheld. There's only one way it can be overturned. The same way it was passed--elect a new president and a new congress. That's undoubtedly what [SCOTUS Chief Justice John] Roberts is saying: Your job, not mine. I won't make it easy for you.

Never before that I know of, has a federal tax been placed on inactivity. If you buy something, you pay a sales tax. If you earn income, you pay an income tax. If you do business as a corporation, you pay an excise tax. Now, if you don’t buy health insurance, you pay a tax on not doing so. What else then can be taxed? Not exercising? Not eating broccoli? Not agreeing with the president?

In the wake of his great Supreme Court victory, Obama or one of his minions tweeted on the POTUS's official twitter account that the decision is a "BFD" (expletive included but initialized). Kathryn Jean Lopez, who notes the tweet, also notes that the T shown below is still on offer at the official re-elect Obama website store:

The sight of which prompts KJ to remark:

Makes you want to work a little harder for the other guy, doesn’t it? There may be some overreach in gloating, especially when you are gloating about a hefty tax increase when so many Americans are feeling tremendous economic burdens, that you insisted was nothing of the sort.

Thursday, June 28, 2012

I don't know how it works in your family, but in mine displays of public nekkidness, sexual intercourse and S&M are in no way considered "inclusive and family-friendly," even if that's how Pride organizers and others like to position things. Here's one Pride event, however, that does sound a lot more "family-friendly":

THE LEGEND OF MARSHMALLOW ISLAND Saturday, June 30 @ 11:30am
Come join the fun on this fabulous musical adventure to find Marshmallow Island. This special show adaptation for Pride features a musical frog named Larry who’s gone in search of his missing Dad’s! Meet all the hilarious characters who colour the show with a splash of silly. This Adventure in World Music blends multicultural music themes and interactive audience participation! Featuring incredible sound effects and unique instruments from around the world. Bring the whole family to laugh and learn together as we track down ‘The Legend of Marshmallow Island’.

"Eloquent" union boss Jimmy Hazel comments on revelations re the outrageous fees he charges the Toronto District School Board for upkeep services ("$143 to install a pencil sharpener, $2,900 to install an electrical outlet, that kind of thing").

Update: "The Maintenance and Construction Skilled Trades Council (MCSTC) represents a completely different approach to union
representation and public sector service. We represent not only one trade, as in
traditional unions, but over 20 individual trades, encompassing every facet of
service. This unique structure allows total flexibility within the system,
enabling us to provide the best building services at the most competitive
rates..."

Update: "We have nothing to cut," claims School Trustee Cathy Dandy about the tapped-out, mismanaged Toronto public school system. For starters, Ms. Dandy, how about cutting the cost of electrical outlet installations?

Well, given her CV, how could she not offer an inpracticable judicial remedy?

Update: "Professor Irwin Cotler, the former minister of justice and attorney general of Canada, has drafted a brilliant brief making the case for indicting the Iranian leaders for inciting genocide against the Jewish people." Best of luck with that one, Professor, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it proceeding, brimming over though it is with obvious brilliance.

So we flew out of Dulles airport after spending a delightful, albeit very hot and humid, four days en famille in America's capital. Upon unpacking his suitcase back home (in Canada), my husband found a piece of paper that read:

Transportation Security Administration
NOTICE OF BAGGAGE INSPECTION

To protect you and your fellow passengers, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is required by law to inspect all checked baggage. As part of this process, some bags are opened and physically inspected. Your bag was among those selected for physical inspection.

During the inspection, your bag and its contents may have been searched for prohibited items. At the completion of the inspection, the contents were returned to your bag.

If the TSA security officer was unable to open your bag for inspection because it was locked, the officer may have been forced to break the locks on your bag. TSA sincerely regrets having to do this, however TSA is not liable for damage to your locks resulting from this necessary security precaution...

"Necessary"? Sure, but only if you're too afraid to "profile" the people who may pose a genuine security threat and instead engage in silly and futile security theatrics.

I’m marching because I remember as a woman what it meant to be told I cannot, should not and must not. I remember breaking glass ceilings so that others would not have to cut their heads. I remember the fear, the surprise, the shock, the anger, the verbal and public dismissals of my personhood and my place in the Jewish community time and time again, and not so very long ago.

I’m marching to say that Jewish life doesn’t look just one way or like just one type of person. It’s not all mom, dad, 2.2 kids and a dog. We don’t all wear shtreimls, and we don’t all eat gefilte fish. We aren’t all white. We aren’t all married. We aren’t all successful, middle class businesspeople. We aren’t all heterosexual. The Jewish community is as complex as we human beings all are. I’m marching because the Jewish community should – and could – be as vibrant and diverse as this wonderfully diverse city.

I’m marching because it stretches my own envelope, my own comfort zone. And I’m marching because it reminds me that God’s image is mysterious and diverse, and doesn’t look only like me.

I'm not marching because I'm not gay; don't know what it's like to feel like a thorn; and have neither the desire nor the reason to stretch my own envelope/comfort zone.

Also, because Pride caved in like a bunch of pussies to the anti-Zionists.

CAIRO – Arab women and men favor Islamic Shari`ah to play a bigger role in legislation in their countries and that devout men are more likely to support women’s rights than those who are less religious, a new survey has found.

“The majority of women and men across countries experiencing political upheaval do want some level of religious influence in law,” the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies said in a new report.

“Those who want no legislative role at all for Shari`ah are in a small minority in every country.”

The report, “After the Arab Uprising: Women on Rights, Religion and Rebuilding”, found that 44% of women in Egypt want Shari`ah as the only source of legislation in the country...

Of course those "devout men" support "women's rights." But they are the "rights" established under sharia (er, sorry, Shari'ah). They are therefore entirely different than the equal rights men and women are promised in the West, and the equality before the law set out in the UN's foundational document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

That's the proposed title of an exhibit you won't be seeing in Canada's shrine to victimhood, the "human rights" mausoleum; how could curators possibly explain such a reality when, according to "human rights" ideology (a mixture of leftist sophistry and Marxist cant), members of a downtrodden victim group are said to be incapable of hatred and prejudice? Nonetheless, it's here and it's clear:

Just like the alliance between the Islamists and the radical Left, the new alliance between the White Supremacists and the Black Supremacists seems absurd but really isn’t: In both cases, the seemingly vast differences between the sides are trumped by the power of their shared Jew-hatred. And these two alliances are not at all unrelated: There is, of course, already a powerful alliance between the Black Power movement and the Islamist movement, epitomized by Louis Farrakhan and his Nation of Islam. It is clear to anyone following the current trends that very soon, all four of these groups — the radical Left, the Islamists, the Black Supremacists, and the White Supremacists — will all be united in a common offensive against the Jews and Israel.

The Arab Spring has spawned a new generation of British would-be terrorists drawn to the area for training, said the head of MI5, the U.K.’s domestic intelligence agency.

In a speech in London late yesterday, Jonathan Evans said the uprisings in Arab states posed an “immediate” threat to security as al-Qaeda moved in to take advantage of instability in the region.

“Today, parts of the Arab world have once more become a permissive environment for al-Qaeda,” Evans said, according to the text of his speech on MI5’s Website. “This is the completion of a cycle -- al-Qaeda first moved to Afghanistan in the 1990s due to pressure in their Arab countries of origin. They moved on to Pakistan after the fall of the Taliban. And now some are heading home to the Arab world again.”

“And a small number of British would-be jihadis are also making their way to Arab countries to seek training and opportunities for militant activity, as they do in Somalia and Yemen,” he said. “Some will return to the U.K. and pose a threat here.”

Any suggestions that the threat from al-Qaeda in Pakistan has “evaporated” since the assassination of Osama bin Laden last year are misguided, he said. “In back rooms and in cars and on the streets of this country there is no shortage of individuals talking about wanting to mount terrorist attacks here.”...

It isn't the fluffy, insipid, we-are-the-world Judaism of "social justice"/"tikkun olam" lefty types. It champions "the defining Jewish characteristic"--that "of being contrarian and unafraid to stand alone against the mainstream."

That includes the mainstream which sees state censorship as somehow protecting/benefiting Jewry.

This is the sanest thing I've read (so far) about the Muslim Brotherhood's victory in Egypt:

As the Bush administration learned when it attempted to foster Palestinian democracy, elections are meaningless if the only choices are corrupt authoritarians and Islamists. That is just as true today in Egypt when it comes to the military and the Muslim Brotherhood as it was for the Palestinians when their options were Fatah and Hamas. When those opposed to democracy win elections, the result is not democracy.

Subterfuge, subversion and sedition in the name of Shariah are the tradecraft
of the Muslim Brotherhood. Team Obama's enabling of the Brothers' ascendancy in
Egypt and its embrace of their operatives and those of other Islamist
organizations in this country (see MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com) is, if not
actually illegal, certainly dangerous in the extreme.

Barbara Kay writes re Alice Walker's refusal to allow her snoozeroo of a novel to be translated into Hebrew:

Walker's passion for the underdog reminds me of Charles Dickens' ineffable creation, Mrs. Jellyby, in his novel, Bleak House. Mrs. Jellyby's sentimental thoughts are always half a world away with the poor children in Africa, while her own dirty, neglected children must shift for themselves in her chaotic household.

The comparison is particularly apt because Walker has herself boasted that her anti-Zionist motivation springs from anguish over the sufferings of poor Palestinian children. At the time of the flotilla fiasco, she told CNN that all she wanted was to see "justice and respect" for Palestinian children: "One child must never be set above another."

And so, having adduced her love of children as her motivation for her activism, Walker has, as the lawyers say, "opened the door" to evidence of her own mothering practices...

Which, as Kay goes on to recount, leave a lot to be desired. Here's my poem for the author of that Purple book (a colour that also describes much of her prose):

There once was a writer named AliceWho harboured a great deal of Malice.Gave thumbs down to the HebrewAs disdain for the Jew grew.What a blind, bitter shrew the old gal is!

Just goes to show that you can be a former UN "peacekeeping" chief, rise to the rank of Lieutenant-Governor in the Canadian military, sit in Canada's upper chamber, and still be as clueless as all get out.

Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Who cares how it went as long as it's gone. In summarizing what led up to its demise, Charlie Gillis, who's with Maclean's (a publication that itself got caught in the censor's maw), writes:

The effect of killing Section 13 will be debated for years among anti-racist groups and civil libertarians. But it is undoubtedly a turning point. Since 1999, Canadians who felt aggrieved by material transmitted online have been encouraged to seek redress under federal human rights law, which targeted material “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” based on grounds of discrimination like race, religion or sexual orientation. Storseth’s bill repeals the provision outright, leaving the Criminal Code as the primary bulwark against the dissemination of hate propaganda by electronic means.
With it will go one of the most divisive disputes to grip the country since the introduction of the Charter of Rights itself—a contest of values that over the past five years has pitted Canadians’ desire to protect minorities from discrimination against the bedrock principle of free speech. Mainstream media outlets, most notably Maclean’s, have been hauled before commissions to answer for their published content. The commissions themselves have come under fire for allowing their processes to be used as a bludgeon against legitimate expression, tailored as they are to encourage complainants to come forward. Meantime, a Saskatchewan law similar to Section 13 has become the subject of a Supreme Court challenge that could invalidate hate-speech provisions in most provincial human rights codes. By year’s end, it is conceivable that no human rights commission in the country will be in the business of adjudicating published material.

Censorship may be off the table, but our land's intrusive, corrupt, totalitarian-esque "human rights" system is, alas, still alive and kicking.

It is not necessary that everything the West does is according to logic. The biggest proof that it is the invention of the west are the song words without which this function is not complete viz. 'Happy birthday to you.' No one says, 'Happy birthday celebration' or 'Happy Blessed birthday' or any other words of this kind. This disease of celebrating birthdays was never prevalent among Muslims before, but since Muslims started living alongside the non-Muslims, they have been influenced by them.

It isn't only a "disease," it's eee-ville:

It is stated in a Hadith the worst Walima feast is the one in which the poor and destitute are left out and the wealthy are only invited. Another object of the birthday parties is show. Islam encourages simplicity. By this attitude of show, the poor feel inferior and deprived and the rich have a superiority complex. Also, in these gatherings, music, singing, video filming and the taking of photographs and other un-Islamic and forbidden acts take place. May Allah TaÃla guide us and protect us from all these evils.

Now, I really don't care whether or not Muslims celebrate birthdays and sing the song. I would merely point out that the above way of thinking makes it a lot more difficult for Muslims to get used to/fit into non-Muslim lands.

When the discussion turned to what strategies should be adopted by Muslim groups seeing to fight Islamophobia, my number-one tip was: Avoid the subject of Israel. Never mention it. If the goal of your group is to promote the reputation of Islam in general terms in Canadian society, pretend the Middle East doesn’t exist. I say this for a few reasons. First: It’s a deeply divisive subject that tends to raise tempers on both sides of the debate. On this score, I told a story about a disastrous National Post editorial board meeting with the Canadian Arab Federation, in which the entire discussion was hijacked by the visitors’ toxic attitudes toward the Jewish state. It’s one of those subjects that sucks all the extra oxygen out of the room. And at the end of the day, you never really end up changing anyone’s mind. Second, the more you talk about Israel, the greater the chance that a member of your organization will say something truly nutty about Jews or Zionists — or perhaps say something flattering about Hamas or Hezbollah. And, again, when that happens, it’s all anybody comes away from the table talking about. Just look at what happened to the Canadian Islamic Congress after Mohamed Elmasry went on Michael Coren’s TV show in 2004 and agreed to the proposition that “everyone in Israel, irrespective of gender, over the age of 18 is a valid [military] target.”

The bolds, by the way, are Kay's. His "advice," such as it is, can be boiled down as follows: Hey, Muslims, Ix-nay on the Ionism-Zay. That way all you anti-Islamophobes won't tip your hand that you're actually die-hard Zionophobes.

It's an either-or proposition, apparently, given that, for reasons of the Islamic triumphalism iterated in the Koran, the Organization of the Islamic Conference is trying to do away with the former and replace it with the latter--with the willing complicity of the EUnuchs, no less. Scholar of dhimmitude Bat Ye'or 'splains the genocidal game plan.

Two Missouri women redefined the meaning of golf being a gentleman’s game.
The Riverfront Times reports that police were called to Woodlands Golf Course in Alton, Ill., on Monday after a citizen complained that the women were “exposing their sexual organs.”

Shelly Lewis, 45, and Alicia Binford, 43, were charged with public indecency, a misdemeanor. Both women posted $100 bond, The Daily Mail reports.

When police arrived, Madison County Sherrif’s Capt. Mike Dixon said, “the officers didn’t witness Binford and Lewis golfing, they witnessed them pulling their shirts up.”
Dixon said there was cause for concern because children lived surrounding neighborhood.

Dixon told The Daily Mail this sort of behavior is uncommon, but FOX 2 reports that sources indicate this incident occurred at the “Naked Golf Tournament,” which has been an annual event for the last six years.

Capt. Dixon disputed the notion that these women were “professionals.”

“They’re not strippers, they’re golfers,” said Dixon.

Er, isn't it possible to be both (i.e. golfers who strip/strippers who golf)? (They must have a very strange anatomy if their "sexual organs" are located under their shirts.)

WINNIPEG, MANITOBA, Jun 18, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Mr. Stuart
Murray, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Museum for Human
Rights (CMHR), and Ms. Barbara Hall, President of the Canadian Association of
Statutory Human Rights Agencies (CASHRA), signed a memorandum of understanding
today that will see their organizations work jointly to fulfill their common
goals of encouraging and fostering the advancement, promotion and understanding
of human rights.

"This agreement marks the beginning of a long-term relationship that will
allow the CMHR and CASHRA to provide the Canadian public greater access to
information about human rights issues and opportunities to advance human
rights," Stuart Murray said. "Human rights agencies across the country serve an
important public role and this agreement is an excellent starting point for both
our organizations."

"Every person, especially students, should have the opportunity to learn
about human rights in Canada and abroad," Barbara Hall said. "By combining the
educational forces of every commission in the country with the CMHR's
initiatives, we will come close to achieving this goal."

This memorandum of understanding establishes a framework for collaboration
between the CMHR and CASHRA to work together to explore and implement
opportunities for collaboration and mutual support in the pursuit of promoting
human rights in Canada and internationally. It also outlines both organizations'
commitment to educating youth about human rights issues and creating
opportunities for young people to learn about human rights and empower them to
take action in their communities and beyond...

In other words, it will empower our "human rights" undead to boss us around and micro-manage our lives even more than they do currently.

Ronan Farrow (born December 19, 1987) is an American human rights activist, freelance journalist, Rhodes Scholar, lawyer and government official.[1]He is currently serving in the Obama administration as Special Adviser to the Secretary of State for Global Youth Issues and director of the State Department's Global Youth Issues office. He assumed his current role following two years as the State Department’s Special Adviser for Humanitarian and NGO Affairs in the Office of the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.[1]

Woody must be "sheppingnaches," even if his dalliance with Ronan's sis caused a permanent breech.

No trope is more common today than the injunction to engage in tikkun olam. The Hebrew phrase has an ancient pedigree, with spiritual if not mystical connotations; but of decidedly recent vintage is its current interpretation: namely, that Jews are uniquely responsible for improving the lives of their fellow human beings. For many, indeed, the imperative of social action defines the essence of Judaism. In American Grace, a study of contemporary American religion, Robert Putnam and David Campbell report that Jews (unlike their Christian counterparts) tend to be tongue-tied on matters of belief and religious observances but speak with great certainty about their responsibility to help “repair the world.” So important has this mission become that in some quarters it is held to supersede all other commandments. In the words of a young Reform rabbi in Los Angeles: “Don’t keep kosher, that’s fine; don’t keep Shabbat, that’s fine; marry a non-Jew—whatever. But understand that it will take away your Jewish identity if you don’t fight for justice.”

Here's the thing: "tikkun olam" is not the same as Judaism proper, even if leftist Jews have come to believe it is.